House of Commons Hansard #62 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was education.

Topics

SupplyGovernment Orders

3:55 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Scott Brison Progressive Conservative Kings—Hants, NS

Mr. Speaker, good government means looking ahead. Good government means recognizing trends, especially in a global environment.

The PC government recognized the global trends and brought this country free trade, the deregulation of financial services, transportation and energy, which enabled Canadians to compete nationally and internationally. The Liberal government inherited a country that was poised globally to compete and to succeed. It could have invested in Canadians. It could have provided opportunities for Canadians to succeed. Instead of allowing Canadians to embrace the future, the Liberal cuts to health and education transfers handcuffed young Canadians to the past.

The 280% growth in student debt has been a significant yolk, a significant burden on all young Canadians. The loss is to Canada. When are young people are graduating with a $25,000 student debt after a four year program, that is a loss to all of Canada. If we look at the reasons why Canadians are going south of the border and young people are pursuing their dreams elsewhere, we have to recognize that student debt and high taxes in Canada are directly related to that.

The February 14 issue of the Globe and Mail said:

There is evidence that the heavier tax burden, combined with lower overall incomes in this country is putting in motion a brain drain of our most productive workers. Higher tax loads mean bureaucrats substituting their judgment for that of business people and workers on how their income is to be spent. That is no recipe for productivity growth.

This is not about partisanship. This is about what is best for Canadians. I hope all members of this House support this motion because it is extraordinarily important that we take a non-partisan perspective on an issue as important as brain draining.

Like a lot of families in Atlantic Canada over the past 30 years, my family and I have watched the phenomenon of brain drain. We have watched our young people move to central Canada, for instance, to seek opportunities. It is very sad.

This phenomenon now exists throughout Canada. When the finance minister or any of these members fail to acknowledge the issue, when they look into that camera they are looking into the eyes of mothers and fathers in Atlantic Canada who are losing members of their families. They are losing their children. They are going away. The romantic thought that they will return some day just does not happen.

We have always talked about our standard of living in Canada and the quality of life our health and social programs provide us. With the right income that can be bought elsewhere. That is exactly what is happening.

Eighty per cent of Waterloo computer science graduates are now going to the U.S. There is a standing offer by Microsoft for Waterloo computer science graduates. Why? It recognizes the talent we have in Canada and that the Canadian economy will not provide the same level of incentive and opportunity for young people as the U.S. economy.

Let us look at some of the other issues in the U.S. On average, American manufacturing workers are paid $1 more per hour than Canadians. Effectively Canadians are paying one-third more in income taxes than Americans. The U.S. savings rate has remained steady at about 6%. That is about three times what Canadians have been able to save.

The budget will be about choices and we feel very strongly that those choices should be with Canadians. The Minister of Finance did not balance the books. The books were balanced by Canadians who have made significant sacrifices in their lives over the past four years. It is those Canadians who now deserve an opportunity to build their futures and to invest in their families, their educations and their homes in Canada.

Our registered education savings plan would provide tax deductibility. It is very similar to the structure of the RRSP. It would provide Canadians with more flexibility to save for their dreams, dreams that are important to them and their children.

That is the type of policy we are looking for and would like to see in the upcoming budget. We do not need the gigantic traditional Liberal policy of bringing forward some sexy program like the millennium scholarship program which will effectively do more for the Prime Minister's legacy than it will for young Canadians who are graduating at this point with significant debt load.

We need tax reduction. We are speaking about increasing the basic personal exemption from $6,500 to $10,000. Why should a Canadian making $8,000 per year be paying taxes? We have to ask ourselves that hard question. Why should a family that is below the poverty line be paying income taxes? It is fundamentally wrong. It is creating a direct disincentive to work and employment. It is similar to EI premiums which the government has refused to deal with in a significant way. We believe they should be set at about $2 as opposed to $2.70.

Payroll taxes, EI premiums and the CPP tax grab the government has implemented are the biggest impediments to job growth in Canada. High taxes kill jobs and the most insidious tax as a job killer is the payroll tax.

That has been demonstrated internationally. Policy does not need to be created in a vacuum. We can look at other countries and how they have succeeded. Let me say that high taxes kill jobs in any jurisdiction that practises them. In a global environment we do not have the luxury of taxing our citizenry to death because when we do it we are preventing them from participating in economic growth and prosperity in a global environment.

As we enter the 21st century what would be the best policy to ensure that our young people are able to compete in a global knowledge based environment? It is one that provides them with opportunities to seek and receive education and to succeed within their own countries.

The tax burden that has been inflicted on Canadians since 1993 with successive tax increases is draining the incentive for our brightest and best to stay in Canada and they are moving to the U.S.

We have a number of members from Atlantic Canada in our caucus who have a good understanding of this issue, based on what we have seen happening in our families over the past 20 or 30 years. It is now a national phenomenon.

If members opposite—and I see some of them grinning—do not take it seriously I would suggest they wait for a few years. When the continued government policy of high taxes has an impact on their families and their children move to the U.S. and other parts of the world, perhaps they will take the issue more seriously. I hope they will come to their senses and support policies to keep our young people in Canada.

This is an important issue, especially if we look at it from the perspective of Nova Scotians. Nova Scotia is the cradle of higher education in Canada. When I consider the impacts of the government's policies of taxing and cutting on my province and on my region, this issue is particularly important to me. In fact, to underline just how important this motion is, I would like to take this opportunity to move the following amendment to the motion:

That the motion be amended by adding the word “serious” before the words “brain drain” in the third line of the motion.

It is absolutely critical that all members of the House support the motion and ensure the policies we generate as parliamentarians will provide opportunities for our young people to embrace the future as we enter the 21st century and not handcuff them to the past.

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:05 p.m.

The Speaker

The amendment to the motion is in order.

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

John Bryden Liberal Wentworth—Burlington, ON

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The hon. member for Kings—Hants in his remarks said that members opposite were smiling. I was watching along here and there was no one smiling at the time.

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:05 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh.

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:05 p.m.

The Speaker

We have five minutes and I am going to try to recognize all members who want to ask questions or make comments. I recognize the hon. parliamentary secretary. He has 30 seconds.

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:05 p.m.

Kent—Essex Ontario

Liberal

Jerry Pickard LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Public Works and Government Services

Mr. Speaker, I found the hon. member's comments rather interesting. I am sorry but I did smile.

I smiled because I recalled a sales tax in this country called the manufacturers' sales tax going from 9% to 13% under five years of Conservative government.

I smiled because I saw the business tax base go up and up, year after year, when the Conservatives were in office.

I smiled because the GST was introduced by—

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:05 p.m.

The Speaker

For 30 seconds, the hon. member for Kings—Hants.

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:05 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Scott Brison Progressive Conservative Kings—Hants, NS

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the hon. member's comments. He really should not be smiling at all because the Conservative government eliminated the manufacturers' sales tax and replaced it with a consumption tax, the GST, which made more sense in a global environment and his party committed to ripping it up.

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:10 p.m.

Reform

Werner Schmidt Reform Kelowna, BC

Mr. Speaker, in the interest of moving the debate to another level, may I suggest that the motion we are debating is a rather encouraging motion. At the same time it is shortsighted and really incomplete.

Would members opposite be interested in adding another dimension to the motion concerning a shift from withdrawing funds from basic research and the infrastructure that is necessary to do research? Many of the brains that are drained from Canada—

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:10 p.m.

The Speaker

The hon. member for Kings—Hants.

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:10 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Scott Brison Progressive Conservative Kings—Hants, NS

Mr. Speaker, the whole issue of investment in research and development is extremely important.

We are the only country in the G-7 countries that has actually reduced its commitment over the past several years. I take the hon. member's suggestion very seriously. We as a party are extremely supportive of an increased commitment to research and development, especially medical research and development.

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

Alex Shepherd Liberal Durham, ON

Mr. Speaker, having three children in post-secondary education I understand the problems. Microsoft is now recruiting people in Canada to stay in Canada. With the technology today no one has to leave the country.

The reality is that this government and the member for Sherbrooke raised the debt in this country from $169,549 million to $466,198 million a 274% increase. These people left us with a mortgage that we have to pay and that is why we cannot reduce taxes.

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:10 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Scott Brison Progressive Conservative Kings—Hants, NS

Mr. Speaker, perhaps if we looked back at history we would see that Pierre Trudeau inherited no debt. It was the Liberal government's interventionist, anti-Canadian policies which led to the significant debt that we inherited in 1984.

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

Paul Szabo Liberal Mississauga South, ON

Mr. Speaker, during his speech the leader of the Conservative Party mentioned that the after tax income of Americans was some $30,000 and of Canadians was only $17,000, if I heard him correctly.

He failed to mention that there are differences in the two income tax systems. In Canada we have a child tax benefit which is outside the tax system. We also have a GST credit which is outside the tax system. We also have government paid health services that we pay in our tax system which is not covered in the U.S. by its tax system. In addition, the social fabric of the U.S. does not respect—

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:10 p.m.

The Speaker

The hon. member for Kings—Hants.

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:10 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Scott Brison Progressive Conservative Kings—Hants, NS

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member has so many good reasons why Canadians should stay in Canada, he should be speaking to all the Canadians who are leaving Canada. He obviously knows something that ordinary Canadians do not.

Canadians are making decisions and voting with their feet. They are going to the U.S. because the level of taxation is lower. If they want a standard of living, they can buy it down there. This government's cuts to health and social transfers over the past four years is denying Canadians the quality health care they need in Canada.

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:10 p.m.

Parry Sound—Muskoka Ontario

Liberal

Andy Mitchell LiberalSecretary of State (Parks)

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have an opportunity to speak to the motion. It will allow me to talk about some of the economic progress the government has been able to achieve with Canadians over the last four years. It will also give me an opportunity to deal with the absolute, total and complete hypocrisy of the Tory Party that put forward the motion.

The Tories have a very selective memory. I do not blame hon. members every time it is brought up for saying “Let's not talk about that. We will just point toward the future”.

Many of the challenges we have in the future are the result of their total incompetency in managing the Canadian economy for the nine years in which they were in power. In fact it is to the point that back in 1994, shortly after we had taken over, the Wall Street Journal described what the Tory government had done to this country by saying that Canada was then a candidate for membership in the third world.

That is a party which with the very words of its motion says volumes about the way it thinks. The Conservatives do not look to the historic progress Canada has achieved over the last 50 years in creating social policy that is the envy of the world. No, they do not look toward that. What they look toward is the United States.

The Conservatives look to the model of the United States. It is a model where we see millions of people without health care. It is a model where they create employment by simply driving down minimum wages so that people are not able to live on those wages. It is a country where the inner cities are totally crumbling. That is the model that party points to and it totally ignores what this nation has been able to accomplish.

More important, when we talk about a party that does not honour Canada, that is the party which just last week in this House totally abandoned the interests of Canada and voted with the separatists. It abandoned Canadians. That is what that party across the way did last week. It is total hypocrisy. I am sorry to use that word again, Mr. Speaker, but that is what that party did. What does not help the country is voting with the separatists.

But let us return to the debate. This debate is about what Canada has in fact been able to achieve over the last few years. Again, there is faulty memory.

The Tories came to power. And they are right. There was a deficit. It was around $38 billion in 1984. Boy, they worked to bring it down. They had policies to bring that deficit down. They were going to clean up the finances of the country. They inherited $38 billion and what was it when they left nine years later? Had they eliminated it? Had they made progress on it? Yes, they made progress right up to $41 billion. That is the progress that they made. In the process of doing that they more than doubled the national debt. That is the type of progress the Tory party made in terms of controlling the deficit.

The balance sheet is not the only thing we ought to be looking at. I know the Tories certainly do not want to look at it. In half the time it managed to go from that $42 billion deficit which we inherited to a point, and I will quote the finance minister who I believe said “on the cusp of a balanced budget”. That is $38 billion to $41 billion in eight years and $42 billion to zero in four. I think the Canadian people were quite appropriate in the choices they made back in 1997.

Let us look at another important measure which is the measurement of job creation in the last four and a half years. We have made some progress but it is certainly not enough yet. Unemployment is at 8.9% although that is a lot better than the 11.2% when we took office. It is still not good enough and more progress does have to be made.

Let us make that comparison in job creation. In the first 51 months of this government's mandate there has been over one million net new jobs created in this country. Most are in the private sector and most are full time. What happened in the last four years of the Tory government? We saw much the same progress as we saw on the deficit, a 58,000 decrease in net new jobs in this country in that period. Let us compare the record: 58,000 jobs lost, or over a million jobs created.

I think Canadians understand that the economic policies of this government have meant progress for Canada. Increasingly better economic ideas have meant a better country economically for the people of Canada.

Let us talk about taxation for a minute. We believe in reducing taxes. In fact the last budget saw a number of significant tax decreases. But they were tax decreases, not as the Tory party suggests across the board where those who earn more get a bigger tax break, they were targeted tax decreases.

They were tax decreases that were important to Canadians who needed it. For example, $850 million to low and middle income Canadians with children. Tax reductions for Canadians with disabilities. Tax reductions for Canadians making charitable donations. Tax reductions to help individuals pursue post-secondary education.

We believe in applying principles when it comes to tax reductions. One of the most important ones is that low and middle income Canadians will benefit first from tax reduction. Second, tax reductions will be provided when we have the surpluses to provide them, not by going out and borrowing the money as the Tory party has suggested we do.

Let us just talk about one particular tax reduction the Tories did suggest during the campaign. I want everybody to listen to this because this is almost unbelievable. The Tories suggested that corporate income tax would be reduced from 28% to 24%. That is right in their platform.

What would that mean? That would mean that those paupers of Canadian society, those hard done by people in Canadian society, the Canadian financial institutions, the Canadian banks, would receive a $300 million tax reduction under the Tory plan. That is what they were suggesting, that we reduce taxes for Canadian banks by $300 million. That is their idea of progressive tax reduction.

Canadians saw the type of ideas that they were trying to put forward and they were not fooled. Canadians understand something and they understand it well. Although we continue to have difficulties in this country, and we do—I do not think anybody in this House would suggest that we do not—Canadians understand that the policies of this government have worked to improve the situation.

We took over in 1993 at a time when the previous government had put this country close to economic ruin. We have restored the health of the nation's finances. We have seen employment increase. We have historically low interest rates as compared to the Americans. We have a sustained low inflation rate that is the envy of the industrialized world. In fact we have had economic growth in the last 12 months near the very top of the OECD.

There is one conclusion that Canadians have, and that is that the Tories' incompetency in managing the financial affairs of this nation is matched only by their audacity in trying to re-write history.

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:20 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Scott Brison Progressive Conservative Kings—Hants, NS

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has a penchant for quoting publications. It is a penchant I share as well. One of the publications I enjoy is the Economist . For $172 a year he could be similarly well informed. And that is in Canadian dollars by the way, which makes it even better value now that the dollar has been so weak.

The Economist on the deficit issue and the elimination of the deficit in its 1998 preview said that the credit belongs to structural changes made in the early 1990s. It listed free trade, GST, deregulation of financial services, transportation and energy. You know, the national energy program. Members opposite may remember that.

Where does the member's party stand on free trade and the GST?

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

Andy Mitchell Liberal Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member may have deluded himself in believing that the management of the economy between 1984 and 1993 was so great, but Canadians did not buy it. They did not buy it in 1993 when there were two Conservative members and they did not buy much more of it in 1997 when there were only 20 of them. They understand what was there. Employment down 100,000. Real disposable income down one and a half points. Real disposable income per capita down 6.6%. Canadians understand.

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:25 p.m.

Reform

Werner Schmidt Reform Kelowna, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am really quite intrigued by the comments made by previous speaker, the member who made the presentation. I thought this motion related to students and keeping brains in Canada. I thought it was concerned with identifying reasons for losing them.

I refer the hon. member to his own record and the record of the government at this time. In successive budgets the government has reduced the money available for science and technology, in particular for research and development and especially basic research.

Would the member be prepared to address the question of how we could keep our brains in this country and provide them with the research infrastructure that is so necessary to develop and advance knowledge?

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

Andy Mitchell Liberal Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON

Mr. Speaker, in the last budget we saw the foundation for innovation, an $800 million investment into exactly that type of thing.

In the last budget a series of measures were introduced to help Canadians pursuing post-secondary education. There was an expansion of the registered education savings plan; 100% increase in the education tax credit; changes in the tax system to allow a carry forward of the tuition deduction; expansion of the tuition deduction; and the interest relief period being increased from 18 months to 30 months. When added to the original six months, the period becomes three years. This government has taken very specific measures.

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:25 p.m.

Reform

Mike Scott Reform Skeena, BC

Mr. Speaker, I truly never thought I would be sitting in this Chamber listening to the Liberals and the Tories bragging about who ran up the best national debt. I cannot believe it. But the member has a point. In 1984 Mr. Mulroney was elected with a landslide on the promise to do something about the debt. He had nine years to do it and he did not.

With the concern about the brain drain that is coming from the Tories, would the member not agree that the brain drain has already occurred, that the people with any brains have left the Tories and joined the Reform Party?

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:25 p.m.

The Speaker

I will take that as a comment rather than as a question.

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

Andy Mitchell Liberal Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON

Mr. Speaker, I will not get involved in the courting of the Reform Party and the Tory Party. I will let them deal with that on their own.

The record is very clear. This government has managed to bring the deficit probably down to zero. We will know next week if we have reached zero or if we are just short of it. We have made a commitment to debt reduction and tax reduction. We will invest in the types of programs Canadians believe in. Programs related to education, job creation and health care are the kinds of investments Canadians have asked us to make and those are the investments we will make.

SupplyGovernment Orders

4:25 p.m.

The Speaker

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Medicine Hat. I erroneously told him he had 20 minutes. He has 10 minutes to speak.